Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 04:15:04PM +0100, Uwe Bugla wrote:
>> ...
>> b) it mixes multiple independent
>>> small patches into one large hunk.
>> What is the pragmatic alternative if so many modules were just broken within
>> the maintainership of your personal authority? I am sure I won´t get no
>> answer from you to that.
>> Leaving your personal attacks aside, this is a general rule in the
> kernel.
>> Please read the section "Break up your changes" in the
> Documentation/HOWTO file in recent 2.6 kernel sources.
>>> [ some more personal attacks against Johannes ]
>> Some things to have in mind when doing kernel development:
> - we are humans, each with own faults
> - many people maintain a part of the kernel in their spare time, and
> "real life" is sometimes more important
> - Linux kernel development has rules, e.g. some of them are described in
> Documentation/HOWTO
>> If you think Linux kernel development sucks that is no problem - the
> Linux development model has both advantages and disadvantages (not that
> I was happy with every detail) as with every other model.
>> If you don't like it, there are several other good open source operating
> systems available and perhaps one of them fits better with your ideas
> how to do development.
>>> Uwe
>> cu
> Adrian
According to his demands, it seems he would be better off using closed
source OS-es like Windows, and pay even for drivers. And he would be
served promptly ;-)
cu,
Lucian